Re: V XCF,xxxx,OFFLINE,REIPL not working

[Jesse 1 Robinson]

It's been long time since I had this problem. I'm fuzzy on the solution, but I 
think it's either

a. Status Detect parameter in sysplex couple data set definition, or
b. LPAR cross partition authority in IMAGE profile

For sure CF connection is not necessary. There is a functional difference 
between 'automatic IPL' after wait state, and REIPL specified on the V XCF,OFF 
command. Hopefully someone else can clarify. 

.
.
J.O.Skip Robinson
Southern California Edison Company
Electric Dragon Team Paddler 
SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager
323-715-0595 Mobile
626-543-6132 Office ⇐=== NEW
robin...@sce.com


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of ??? ?? ???
Sent: Sunday, April 09, 2017 2:38 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: (External):Re: V XCF,,OFFLINE,REIPL not working

Hi Lucas,
Yes, AUTOIPL is coded in DIAGxx and when I issue D DIAG, I get the expected 
results.
In hardware messages, I see:
A program directed re-IPL has been initiated for partition CMP1

But no errors.

Gadi


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Lucas Rosalen
Sent: Sunday, April 9, 2017 12:29 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: V XCF,,OFFLINE,REIPL not working

Hi Gadi,

Did you have AUTOIPL statements coded in the in-use DIAGxx member?
Anything in Hardware Messages?

Lucas

On Apr 9, 2017 09:56, "גדי בן אבי"  wrote:

Hi,
We IPL’s one of our systems last night and using the V XCF,,OFFLINE,REIPL 
to remove it from the Sysplex, and then REIPL it.

The system was not reipl’d, and we had to IPL from the HMC.

Can someone help me find out why this happened?

We are running z/OS v2.1 on a z13s.

The Sysplex has two systems, and they are connected using CTC’s.

There is no coupling facility involved.

Thanks

Gadi
ribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: MAS to Standalone Spool

[Jesse 1 Robinson]

I'm not sure that anything has to be done at the outset. There is essentially 
no difference between MEMBERA running by itself in a MAS and MEMBERA running in 
its own separate MAS. There either is or is not another member to talk to. If 
MEMBERA is IPLed first in a MAS, for example, it is running more or less 
standalone until another member is IPLed.

The tricky stuff arises if and when you want this reincarnated MEMBERA to talk 
to other JES nodes. In other words, it's not a MAS issue but rather an NJE 
issue. Those are the parameters you need to focus on. Most of them can be 
changed dynamically after MEMBERA is running. 

.
.
J.O.Skip Robinson
Southern California Edison Company
Electric Dragon Team Paddler 
SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager
323-715-0595 Mobile
626-543-6132 Office ⇐=== NEW
robin...@sce.com


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Peter
Sent: Saturday, April 08, 2017 3:24 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: (External):MAS to Standalone Spool

Hi

Can someone guide me on what would be the procedure to move an LPAR from MAS( 
Multi Access Spool) to a standalone Spool. What are the changes required from 
JES2PARM and other library ?

We are moving an LPAR from z hardware to zPDT.

Any advice would be appreciated.

Peter


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Program software to make SMS calls

[Andrew Rowley]

On 7/04/2017 11:38 PM, James Wellingtin wrote:

Does anybody know of any software for mainframe Z/OS where you can send SMS
messages to a mobile phone  and maybe make a predefined speak to a mobile
phone.

Or maybe specify a way to do it.


For this type of problem I would suggest trying a Java solution. With 
Java on z/OS, instead of looking for a mainframe specific solution you 
can widen the scope immensely to a Java solution.


Googling "SMS from Java" gives plenty of hits, a couple that look promising:

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2570410/how-to-send-sms-in-java

https://www.twilio.com/blog/2016/04/sending-sms-with-java.html


--
Andrew Rowley
Black Hill Software
+61 413 302 386

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Timerons/Seconds vs Wall-clock Time

[John McKown]

On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 12:01 PM, Clark Morris 
wrote:

> [Default] On 9 Apr 2017 09:41:33 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
> lindy.mayfi...@sas.com (Lindy Mayfield) wrote:
>
> >I only have CPU time from SMF 30 but I don't have elapsed time which is
> very important.  I'd like to somewhat infer that a high CPU time means the
> job ran a long time.
>
> There is a step start time and date in the SMF 30 type 4 record.  I am
> not certain if there is a step stop time and date since I don't want
> to take the time to bring up the appropriate manual and I don't have
> access to the Assembler Macros.  There may be other records that have
> start and stop times and the SMF 26 records may have execution time
> but only for the job.
>

​The SMF record is written when the step ends. Therefore, I have alway
_assumed_ that the SMF date written field (which exists on all SMF
records) is the "step end time".​



>
> Clark Morris
>
>
-- 
"Irrigation of the land with seawater desalinated by fusion power is
ancient. It's called 'rain'." -- Michael McClary, in alt.fusion

Maranatha! <><
John McKown

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Timerons/Seconds vs Wall-clock Time

[Vince Coen]

That funny enough is interesting.

In accumulating total CPU usage however no account appears to show up 
the secondary (offloaded) processes  such as in

the block or char controllers etc.


Under *nix you can account for all i/p and if one knows the processors 
used can therefore work it out but life is too short.


All counts at least for accountants :)

But there again I am (was) not...

Vincent


On 09/04/17 19:10, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote:

vbc...@gmail.com (Vince Coen) writes:

A M/F may not break down CPU time between system and the application
depending on O/S used.

as undergraduate in the 60s, I remember rewritting some CP/67 (precursor
to vm370) so that it world accurately account for all time. More than a
decade later I saw code in unix that was similar to the 60s cp/67 code.

I conjectured that was because some of the CTSS people had gone to the
5th flr to work on multics and others had gone to the ibm science center
on the 4th flr and did cp/40-cms, cp/67-cms, invented GML, bunch of
online stuff, etc. Folklore that the people that had originally done
Unix had previously been working on Multics and "Unix" is a play on
simplified Multics.

About the time I encountered the Unix code ... MVS was claiming that
unaccounted (cpu) time could easily be 50-60% aka "capture ratio", they
calculated wallclock cpu "wait" time, so the inverse was wallclock cpu
use, "capture ratio" was the accounted for cpu divided by (wallclock
elapsed time minus wait time).

This showed up when internal datacenters were bursting at the seams with
largest POK mainframes ... and were looking at offloading lots of the
MVS workload to distributed 4341s out in departmental areas ... and were
not correctly taking into account "capture ratio".

Some of these very large MVS applications weren't able to run on
vm/370-cms.  The issue was that the original os/360 system services
simulation was only 64kbytes ... and a much more complete implementation
somehow got lost when head of POK convinced corporate to kill vm370
product in the mid-70s (and transfer the people to work on MVS/XA)
... Endicott did eventually manage to resurrect the VM370 product
administration ... but had to reconstitute a group from scratch.

as referenced in this old email (discussing "capture ratio" and other
things) ... it only took another 12kbytes of system services simulation
to get the MVS applications into VM/370-CMS production
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006v.html#email800717



--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

AW: Re: CPU Timerons/Seconds vs Wall-clock Time

[Peter Hunkeler]

> Elapsed time will ALWAYS be longer than CPU time.


This is only true if there is no multitasking / multithreading in the job. 
Lindy asked quite generally if a job's elapsed time would always be longer than 
the cpu time it used. And the general answer would be no.


My DB2 colleagues run DB2 reorgs as batch jobs. Just lately, I saw one of these 
job using 670% (yes, that is six-seven-zero) of cpu over a really long time 
(can't check the exact number right now). If that job would be given the 
access, the cpu usage in say 30 minutes of elapsed would be some 200 minutes.



An extreme example, I admit.


--
Peter Hunkeler




--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Timerons/Seconds vs Wall-clock Time

[Lizette Koehler]

I am not sure that looking at one SMF record can tell the story.

If the job ran long, was it due to

I/O

Looping Code

Larger than normal Data Load

And so on.

Maybe other can provide better insight.

Lizette


> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
> Behalf Of Lindy Mayfield
> Sent: Sunday, April 09, 2017 9:42 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: CPU Timerons/Seconds vs Wall-clock Time
> 
> I only have CPU time from SMF 30 but I don't have elapsed time which is very
> important.  I'd like to somewhat infer that a high CPU time means the job ran
> a long time.
> 
> /Lindy
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
> Behalf Of Lizette Koehler
> Sent: sunnuntai 9. huhtikuuta 2017 18.55
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: CPU Timerons/Seconds vs Wall-clock Time
> 
> What are you trying to solve?
> 
> Jobs get swapped in and out depending on what work they are doing.
> 
> 
> Are you trying to relate wall clock to cpu time?  I have seen jobs run 2 hours
> wall clock time and only take 10 mins of CPU time.
> 
> Lizette
> 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
> > On Behalf Of Lindy Mayfield
> > Sent: Sunday, April 09, 2017 8:48 AM
> > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> > Subject: CPU Timerons/Seconds vs Wall-clock Time
> >
> > This may or may not be the dumbest question I've asked this week, but
> > I've been working with Linux a lot lately so that's my excuse.
> >
> > For example, if an MVS job ran and consumed 10 CPU seconds (SMF 30 I
> > think), can I assume that it at least took 10 seconds of elapsed time to
> run?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Lindy

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Timerons/Seconds vs Wall-clock Time

[retired mainframer]

If a job executes in parallel threads on multiple CPUs, the CPU time could
be more than the elapsed time.

A massive number cruncher could run for an hour and consume 59 minutes of
CPU.  An interactive application that waits on a user could run for an hour
and consume only seconds of CPU.

> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
> Behalf Of Lindy Mayfield
> Sent: Sunday, April 09, 2017 9:42 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: CPU Timerons/Seconds vs Wall-clock Time
> 
> I only have CPU time from SMF 30 but I don't have elapsed time which is
very important.
> I'd like to somewhat infer that a high CPU time means the job ran a long
time.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Fwd: Apache Spark on z listserver or forum?

[Cheryl Watson]

Hi Roger,

I'd like to mention a web page that we're hosting on our website specifically 
for Apache Spark on z/OS for SMF analysis.  We 've just started it, but have 
Rocket's and IBM's support to host sample code and presentations.  We'll be 
adding a forum or listserver some time soon.  Here's the link: 
http://watsonwalker.com/software/watson-walker-spark-zos-support/.

Best regards,
Cheryl

Cheryl Watson
Watson & Walker, Inc.
www.watsonwalker.com


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Roger Lowe
Sent: Friday, January 6, 2017 5:07 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Fwd: Apache Spark on z listserver or forum?

On Fri, 6 Jan 2017 16:50:01 -0500, Erin Farr  wrote:

>>
>> Hi,
>> Our site is currently in the very early stages of dabbling with 
>> Apache Spark on z and was wondering if there is a Listserver or Forum 
>> specifically for Apache Spark on z.
>>
>> Thanks, Roger
>
>Are you asking about Spark on z/OS, or on Linux on z?
>Regardless, I don't know of any forum specific to Spark on z (z/OS nor 
>Linux on z.) I'm development team lead for Spark on z/OS.  I'm willing 
>to investigate setting one up for Spark on z/OS if folks are 
>interested.
>
For us, it will be Spark on z/OS..

Roger

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Timerons/Seconds vs Wall-clock Time

[Anne & Lynn Wheeler]

vbc...@gmail.com (Vince Coen) writes:
> A M/F may not break down CPU time between system and the application
> depending on O/S used.

as undergraduate in the 60s, I remember rewritting some CP/67 (precursor
to vm370) so that it world accurately account for all time. More than a
decade later I saw code in unix that was similar to the 60s cp/67 code.

I conjectured that was because some of the CTSS people had gone to the
5th flr to work on multics and others had gone to the ibm science center
on the 4th flr and did cp/40-cms, cp/67-cms, invented GML, bunch of
online stuff, etc. Folklore that the people that had originally done
Unix had previously been working on Multics and "Unix" is a play on
simplified Multics.

About the time I encountered the Unix code ... MVS was claiming that
unaccounted (cpu) time could easily be 50-60% aka "capture ratio", they
calculated wallclock cpu "wait" time, so the inverse was wallclock cpu
use, "capture ratio" was the accounted for cpu divided by (wallclock
elapsed time minus wait time).

This showed up when internal datacenters were bursting at the seams with
largest POK mainframes ... and were looking at offloading lots of the
MVS workload to distributed 4341s out in departmental areas ... and were
not correctly taking into account "capture ratio".

Some of these very large MVS applications weren't able to run on
vm/370-cms.  The issue was that the original os/360 system services
simulation was only 64kbytes ... and a much more complete implementation
somehow got lost when head of POK convinced corporate to kill vm370
product in the mid-70s (and transfer the people to work on MVS/XA)
... Endicott did eventually manage to resurrect the VM370 product
administration ... but had to reconstitute a group from scratch.

as referenced in this old email (discussing "capture ratio" and other
things) ... it only took another 12kbytes of system services simulation
to get the MVS applications into VM/370-CMS production
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006v.html#email800717

-- 
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Timerons/Seconds vs Wall-clock Time

[Vince Coen]

If you take a look at the logs for the job you will see the start, end 
and lapsed time along with the CPU time for all steps run.


Elapsed time will ALWAYS be longer than CPU time.

Why?
1.  System is multi tasking so runs many jobs at the same time depending 
on capabilities.

2.  Overheads for various external processes that look after the job/s.
3.  Speed of operators (including robots) to load any required tapes or 
exchangeable disk packs if used.

4.  Others, but you get the idea.

Try running similar job/s on a PC at least under Linux within a script 
with a prefix of time you will see the same.


For example running :-

--
#!/bin/bash
time rsync -avvuhh --stats --delete --exclude=/home/vince/.VirtualBox 
--exclude="/home/vince/VirtualBox VMs" --exclude=/home/vince/Music2 
/home /home/vince/Music2/Backups > rsync-home.log 2>rsync-home.err

exit 0
--

Output is  :-

--
[vince@Applewood ~]$ sudo ./rsync-home.sh
[sudo] password for vince:

real1m10.523s
user0m13.190s
sys 0m10.720s
--

So CPU is 13.19 + 10.72  = 23.81   lapsed 70.52 seconds.
This was run on a multi user / tasking system with web, ftp, mysql and 
other servers running.


A M/F may not break down CPU time between system and the application 
depending on O/S used.




Vince

On 09/04/17 17:42, Lindy Mayfield wrote:

I only have CPU time from SMF 30 but I don't have elapsed time which is very 
important.  I'd like to somewhat infer that a high CPU time means the job ran a 
long time.

/Lindy

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Lizette Koehler
Sent: sunnuntai 9. huhtikuuta 2017 18.55
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: CPU Timerons/Seconds vs Wall-clock Time

What are you trying to solve?

Jobs get swapped in and out depending on what work they are doing.


Are you trying to relate wall clock to cpu time?  I have seen jobs run 2 hours 
wall clock time and only take 10 mins of CPU time.

Lizette



-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
On Behalf Of Lindy Mayfield
Sent: Sunday, April 09, 2017 8:48 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: CPU Timerons/Seconds vs Wall-clock Time

This may or may not be the dumbest question I've asked this week, but
I've been working with Linux a lot lately so that's my excuse.

For example, if an MVS job ran and consumed 10 CPU seconds (SMF 30 I
think), can I assume that it at least took 10 seconds of elapsed time to run?

Regards,
Lindy

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN




--
- IMPORTANT –

This email and the information in it may be confidential, legally privileged
and/or protected by law.
It is intended solely for the use of the person to whom it is addressed.
If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately
and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose,
or store or copy the information in any medium.

Please also delete all copies of this email & any attachments from your system.

If this is an encrypted email it is your responsibility to maintain the 1024
byte key system even for one-use keys. Once mail has been sent the sending key
is not kept and therefore a replacement mail cannot be resent.

We cannot guarantee the security or confidentiality of non encrypted email
communications.
We do not accept any liability for losses or damages that you may suffer as a
result of your receipt of this email including but not limited to computer
service or system failure, access delays or interruption, data non-delivery
or mis-delivery, computer viruses or other harmful components.

Copyright in this email and any attachments belongs to Applewood Computers.
Should you communicate with anyone at Applewood Computers by email,
you consent to us monitoring and reading any such correspondence.

Nothing in this email shall be taken or read as suggesting, proposing or
relating to any agreement concerted practice or other practice that could
infringe UK or EC competition legislation (unless it is against Security
requirements).

This Email and its attachments (if any) are scanned for virii using Clamd
and ClamAV 0.99.2 or later (Linux x64).

Dykegrove Limited T/A Applewood Computers is a company registered in England
(no. 01681349) whose registered office is at Applewood House,
17 Stag Green Avenue, Hatfield, Hertfordshire, AL9 5EB, UK.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Timerons/Seconds vs Wall-clock Time

[Lindy Mayfield]

from one single record I cannot get elapsed time, but from a set of records I 
can. 

please, don't look it up. I already have. :)  I'm only dealing with a few 
fields from that record, captured elsewhere, so even if it were there I 
couldn't use it.  

thank you, Clark.  a number of the smf recs layouts used to hang from my door 
at one time, all the way to the floor.  they don't anymore.  

/lindy

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Clark Morris
Sent: sunnuntai 9. huhtikuuta 2017 20.01
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: CPU Timerons/Seconds vs Wall-clock Time

[Default] On 9 Apr 2017 09:41:33 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main 
lindy.mayfi...@sas.com (Lindy Mayfield) wrote:

>I only have CPU time from SMF 30 but I don't have elapsed time which is very 
>important.  I'd like to somewhat infer that a high CPU time means the job ran 
>a long time.

There is a step start time and date in the SMF 30 type 4 record.  I am not 
certain if there is a step stop time and date since I don't want to take the 
time to bring up the appropriate manual and I don't have access to the 
Assembler Macros.  There may be other records that have start and stop times 
and the SMF 26 records may have execution time but only for the job.

Clark Morris
>
>/Lindy
>
>-Original Message-
>From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] 
>On Behalf Of Lizette Koehler
>Sent: sunnuntai 9. huhtikuuta 2017 18.55
>To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>Subject: Re: CPU Timerons/Seconds vs Wall-clock Time
>
>What are you trying to solve?
>
>Jobs get swapped in and out depending on what work they are doing.  
>
>
>Are you trying to relate wall clock to cpu time?  I have seen jobs run 2 hours 
>wall clock time and only take 10 mins of CPU time.
>
>Lizette
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] 
>> On Behalf Of Lindy Mayfield
>> Sent: Sunday, April 09, 2017 8:48 AM
>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>> Subject: CPU Timerons/Seconds vs Wall-clock Time
>> 
>> This may or may not be the dumbest question I've asked this week, but 
>> I've been working with Linux a lot lately so that's my excuse.
>> 
>> For example, if an MVS job ran and consumed 10 CPU seconds (SMF 30 I 
>> think), can I assume that it at least took 10 seconds of elapsed time to run?
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Lindy
>
>--
>For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send 
>email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>
>--
>For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send 
>email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Timerons/Seconds vs Wall-clock Time

[Clark Morris]

[Default] On 9 Apr 2017 09:41:33 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
lindy.mayfi...@sas.com (Lindy Mayfield) wrote:

>I only have CPU time from SMF 30 but I don't have elapsed time which is very 
>important.  I'd like to somewhat infer that a high CPU time means the job ran 
>a long time.

There is a step start time and date in the SMF 30 type 4 record.  I am
not certain if there is a step stop time and date since I don't want
to take the time to bring up the appropriate manual and I don't have
access to the Assembler Macros.  There may be other records that have
start and stop times and the SMF 26 records may have execution time
but only for the job.

Clark Morris
>
>/Lindy
>
>-Original Message-
>From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On 
>Behalf Of Lizette Koehler
>Sent: sunnuntai 9. huhtikuuta 2017 18.55
>To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>Subject: Re: CPU Timerons/Seconds vs Wall-clock Time
>
>What are you trying to solve?
>
>Jobs get swapped in and out depending on what work they are doing.  
>
>
>Are you trying to relate wall clock to cpu time?  I have seen jobs run 2 hours 
>wall clock time and only take 10 mins of CPU time.
>
>Lizette
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] 
>> On Behalf Of Lindy Mayfield
>> Sent: Sunday, April 09, 2017 8:48 AM
>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>> Subject: CPU Timerons/Seconds vs Wall-clock Time
>> 
>> This may or may not be the dumbest question I've asked this week, but 
>> I've been working with Linux a lot lately so that's my excuse.
>> 
>> For example, if an MVS job ran and consumed 10 CPU seconds (SMF 30 I 
>> think), can I assume that it at least took 10 seconds of elapsed time to run?
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Lindy
>
>--
>For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
>lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>
>--
>For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Timerons/Seconds vs Wall-clock Time

[Lindy Mayfield]

you got me on that one, gil. :)  trying to exploit the ambiguity of a Sunday.  
guilty.

i got a side gig to figure out some performance problems, and it ain't on 
linux, but on a real machine.  and nothing is good on tv at the moment.

as Lizette pointed out, elapsed time is one thing independent on cpu.  

and vince pointed out my lack of knowledge.  on unix (linux) cpu can go over 
100%.  but for some reason I thought that no matter what on mvs, 1 cpu second 
(unless multithreaded) equaled 1 second at least wall clock time, no matter the 
cpu configuration.

I could have perhaps asked this a better and more mainframe way:

In the JES log from a batch job, will I ever see an elapsed time less than the 
CPU time?

/Lindy

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: sunnuntai 9. huhtikuuta 2017 19.03
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: CPU Timerons/Seconds vs Wall-clock Time

On Sun, 9 Apr 2017 15:48:12 +, Lindy Mayfield wrote:

>This may or may not be the dumbest question I've asked this week, but I've 
>been working with Linux a lot lately so that's my excuse.
>
(It's only Sunday.)
(On what day does Finland(?) start the week?)

>For example, if an MVS job ran and consumed 10 CPU seconds (SMF 30 I think), 
>can I assume that it at least took 10 seconds of elapsed time to run?
> 
How do multiple CPUs count?  Might it be 10 seconds/number of CPUs active?

-- gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Timerons/Seconds vs Wall-clock Time

[Lindy Mayfield]

I only have CPU time from SMF 30 but I don't have elapsed time which is very 
important.  I'd like to somewhat infer that a high CPU time means the job ran a 
long time.

/Lindy

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Lizette Koehler
Sent: sunnuntai 9. huhtikuuta 2017 18.55
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: CPU Timerons/Seconds vs Wall-clock Time

What are you trying to solve?

Jobs get swapped in and out depending on what work they are doing.  


Are you trying to relate wall clock to cpu time?  I have seen jobs run 2 hours 
wall clock time and only take 10 mins of CPU time.

Lizette


> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] 
> On Behalf Of Lindy Mayfield
> Sent: Sunday, April 09, 2017 8:48 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: CPU Timerons/Seconds vs Wall-clock Time
> 
> This may or may not be the dumbest question I've asked this week, but 
> I've been working with Linux a lot lately so that's my excuse.
> 
> For example, if an MVS job ran and consumed 10 CPU seconds (SMF 30 I 
> think), can I assume that it at least took 10 seconds of elapsed time to run?
> 
> Regards,
> Lindy

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Timerons/Seconds vs Wall-clock Time

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Sun, 9 Apr 2017 15:48:12 +, Lindy Mayfield wrote:

>This may or may not be the dumbest question I've asked this week, but I've 
>been working with Linux a lot lately so that's my excuse.
>
(It's only Sunday.)
(On what day does Finland(?) start the week?)

>For example, if an MVS job ran and consumed 10 CPU seconds (SMF 30 I think), 
>can I assume that it at least took 10 seconds of elapsed time to run?
> 
How do multiple CPUs count?  Might it be 10 seconds/number of CPUs active?

-- gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Timerons/Seconds vs Wall-clock Time

[Vince Coen]

Yes providing you are only running app on one cpu .e., not multi 
threading etc.


On 09/04/17 16:48, Lindy Mayfield wrote:

This may or may not be the dumbest question I've asked this week, but I've been 
working with Linux a lot lately so that's my excuse.

For example, if an MVS job ran and consumed 10 CPU seconds (SMF 30 I think), 
can I assume that it at least took 10 seconds of elapsed time to run?



--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: CPU Timerons/Seconds vs Wall-clock Time

[Lizette Koehler]

What are you trying to solve?

Jobs get swapped in and out depending on what work they are doing.  


Are you trying to relate wall clock to cpu time?  I have seen jobs run 2 hours
wall clock time and only take 10 mins of CPU time.

Lizette


> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
> Behalf Of Lindy Mayfield
> Sent: Sunday, April 09, 2017 8:48 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: CPU Timerons/Seconds vs Wall-clock Time
> 
> This may or may not be the dumbest question I've asked this week, but I've
> been working with Linux a lot lately so that's my excuse.
> 
> For example, if an MVS job ran and consumed 10 CPU seconds (SMF 30 I think),
> can I assume that it at least took 10 seconds of elapsed time to run?
> 
> Regards,
> Lindy

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

CPU Timerons/Seconds vs Wall-clock Time

[Lindy Mayfield]

This may or may not be the dumbest question I've asked this week, but I've been 
working with Linux a lot lately so that's my excuse.

For example, if an MVS job ran and consumed 10 CPU seconds (SMF 30 I think), 
can I assume that it at least took 10 seconds of elapsed time to run?

Regards,
Lindy

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Program software to make SMS calls

[Zahir Hemini]

We use AutoMan to send messages both from scheduled events and in response to 
messages and system events. It is very simple and easy to use.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: V XCF,xxxx,OFFLINE,REIPL not working

[Jatinderpal S Virdi]

Hello Gadi,

Sounds like you are running into the situation described by APAR OA50533.
The apar is still open. The situation arises in a BASE SYSPLEX, where the
storage of one of the systems can be significantly larger than the other.
The APAR contains more details:
.
ERROR DESCRIPTION:
When using REIPL feature on VARY XCF command in a Base Sysplex
(No CF) where one system is large compared to the other(s), the
re-ipl may not be performed. In the reported case one system had
90 GB of real storage while the other had 18 GB.

ANALYSIS:
The Problem is related to Load Clear being used instead of Load
Normal which can take consdierable more time on larger system.
Because of how long the Load Clear takes, it's possible the
RESET issued from the other system could arrive late, and
disrupt the IPL that is in progress (the IPL due to REIPL).
This causes the IPL to stall, and the system needs to be
re-IPLed again

KNOWN IMPACT:
AUTOIPL is not performed. IPL is hung.

VERIFICATION STEPS:
Base Sysplex where systems differ greatly in size.

LOCAL FIX:

BYPASS/CIRCUMVENTION:
Don't specify REIPL on the VARY XCF command and then do a manual
IPL once the system has been RESET.


Jatinderpal (Mickey) S. Virdi
z/OS Software Support (XCF/XES/GRS)
2455 South Road
Poughkeepsie, NY 12601
845-435-8118 T/L 8-295-8116
SUT: 720-349-9829
jvi...@us.ibm.com

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: V XCF,xxxx,OFFLINE,REIPL not working

[גדי בן אבי]

Hi Lucas,
Yes, AUTOIPL is coded in DIAGxx and when I issue D DIAG, I get the expected 
results.
In hardware messages, I see:
A program directed re-IPL has been initiated for partition CMP1

But no errors.

Gadi


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Lucas Rosalen
Sent: Sunday, April 9, 2017 12:29 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: V XCF,,OFFLINE,REIPL not working

Hi Gadi,

Did you have AUTOIPL statements coded in the in-use DIAGxx member?
Anything in Hardware Messages?

Lucas

On Apr 9, 2017 09:56, "גדי בן אבי"  wrote:

Hi,
We IPL’s one of our systems last night and using the V XCF,,OFFLINE,REIPL 
to remove it from the Sysplex, and then REIPL it.

The system was not reipl’d, and we had to IPL from the HMC.

Can someone help me find out why this happened?

We are running z/OS v2.1 on a z13s.

The Sysplex has two systems, and they are connected using CTC’s.

There is no coupling facility involved.

Thanks

Gadi

לתשומת ליבך, בהתאם לנהלי חברת מלם מערכות בע"מ ו/או כל חברת בת ו/או חברה קשורה 
שלה (להלן : "החברה") וזכויות החתימה בהן, כל הצעה, התחייבות או מצג מטעם החברה, 
מחייבים מסמך נפרד וחתום על ידי מורשי החתימה של החברה, הנושא את לוגו החברה או 
שמה המודפס ובצירוף חותמת החברה. בהעדר מסמך כאמור (לרבות מסמך
סרוק) המצורף להודעת דואר אלקטרוני זאת, אין לראות באמור בהודעה אלא משום טיוטה 
לדיון, ואין להסתמך עליה לביצוע פעולה עסקית או משפטית כלשהי. Please note that in 
accordance with Malam and/or its subsidiaries (hereinafter :
"Malam") regulations and signatory rights, no offer, agreement, concession or 
representation is binding on the Malam, unless accompanied by a duly signed 
separate document (or a scanned version thereof), affixed with the Malam seal.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
לתשומת ליבך, בהתאם לנהלי חברת מלם מערכות בע"מ ו/או כל חברת בת ו/או חברה קשורה 
שלה (להלן : "החברה") וזכויות החתימה בהן, כל הצעה, התחייבות או מצג מטעם החברה, 
מחייבים מסמך נפרד וחתום על ידי מורשי החתימה של החברה, הנושא את לוגו החברה או 
שמה המודפס ובצירוף חותמת החברה. בהעדר מסמך כאמור (לרבות מסמך סרוק) המצורף 
להודעת דואר אלקטרוני זאת, אין לראות באמור בהודעה אלא משום טיוטה לדיון, ואין 
להסתמך עליה לביצוע פעולה עסקית או משפטית כלשהי. Please note that in accordance 
with Malam and/or its subsidiaries (hereinafter : "Malam") regulations and 
signatory rights, no offer, agreement, concession or representation is binding 
on the Malam, unless accompanied by a duly signed separate document (or a 
scanned version thereof), affixed with the Malam seal.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: V XCF,xxxx,OFFLINE,REIPL not working

[Lucas Rosalen]

Hi Gadi,

Did you have AUTOIPL statements coded in the in-use DIAGxx member?
Anything in Hardware Messages?

Lucas

On Apr 9, 2017 09:56, "גדי בן אבי"  wrote:

Hi,
We IPL’s one of our systems last night and using the V
XCF,,OFFLINE,REIPL to remove it from the Sysplex, and then REIPL it.

The system was not reipl’d, and we had to IPL from the HMC.

Can someone help me find out why this happened?

We are running z/OS v2.1 on a z13s.

The Sysplex has two systems, and they are connected using CTC’s.

There is no coupling facility involved.

Thanks

Gadi

לתשומת ליבך, בהתאם לנהלי חברת מלם מערכות בע"מ ו/או כל חברת בת ו/או חברה
קשורה שלה (להלן : "החברה") וזכויות החתימה בהן, כל הצעה, התחייבות או מצג
מטעם החברה, מחייבים מסמך נפרד וחתום על ידי מורשי החתימה של החברה, הנושא את
לוגו החברה או שמה המודפס ובצירוף חותמת החברה. בהעדר מסמך כאמור (לרבות מסמך
סרוק) המצורף להודעת דואר אלקטרוני זאת, אין לראות באמור בהודעה אלא משום
טיוטה לדיון, ואין להסתמך עליה לביצוע פעולה עסקית או משפטית כלשהי. Please
note that in accordance with Malam and/or its subsidiaries (hereinafter :
"Malam") regulations and signatory rights, no offer, agreement, concession
or representation is binding on the Malam, unless accompanied by a duly
signed separate document (or a scanned version thereof), affixed with the
Malam seal.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

V XCF,xxxx,OFFLINE,REIPL not working

[גדי בן אבי]

Hi,
We IPL’s one of our systems last night and using the V XCF,,OFFLINE,REIPL 
to remove it from the Sysplex, and then REIPL it.

The system was not reipl’d, and we had to IPL from the HMC.

Can someone help me find out why this happened?

We are running z/OS v2.1 on a z13s.

The Sysplex has two systems, and they are connected using CTC’s.

There is no coupling facility involved.

Thanks

Gadi

לתשומת ליבך, בהתאם לנהלי חברת מלם מערכות בע"מ ו/או כל חברת בת ו/או חברה קשורה 
שלה (להלן : "החברה") וזכויות החתימה בהן, כל הצעה, התחייבות או מצג מטעם החברה, 
מחייבים מסמך נפרד וחתום על ידי מורשי החתימה של החברה, הנושא את לוגו החברה או 
שמה המודפס ובצירוף חותמת החברה. בהעדר מסמך כאמור (לרבות מסמך סרוק) המצורף 
להודעת דואר אלקטרוני זאת, אין לראות באמור בהודעה אלא משום טיוטה לדיון, ואין 
להסתמך עליה לביצוע פעולה עסקית או משפטית כלשהי. Please note that in accordance 
with Malam and/or its subsidiaries (hereinafter : "Malam") regulations and 
signatory rights, no offer, agreement, concession or representation is binding 
on the Malam, unless accompanied by a duly signed separate document (or a 
scanned version thereof), affixed with the Malam seal.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN